East Coast Speculation Thread
Re: East Coast Speculation Thread
@rbsanford. Let me rephrase that, lol. I meant over open water with very little land. Over swamps would be pretty cool to see. Something different than what we are use to seeing now. Last year when I drove from Dallas to Destin, FL...I traveled the Atchafalaya Basin Bridge and that was actually pretty cool to see the swamps. It was long indeed. I don't travel often by car because my legs are long but that was one relaxing trip. I'll be sure to duplicate that route once Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama and Florida are in the game. It'll be awhile though. Probably 6-7 years out from now.
My post are only thoughts and ideas. Don't assume it makes ATS.
Poll: Choose Next 2 ATS States
ATS Flatbed
ATS Special Transport
North American Agriculture
Poll: Out of Production Truck
Poll: Choose Next 2 ATS States
ATS Flatbed
ATS Special Transport
North American Agriculture
Poll: Out of Production Truck
Re: East Coast Speculation Thread
What I am going to say will shock you all, that none of the East Coast will be in 1:20. Here's why?
All of Texas is too compact to be in 1:20.
ATS distance = IRL distance multiplied by scale in game.
Dallas to Fort Worth is about 31 miles. So to calculate the ATS distance that would be 31 * (1/20)
You get 1.55 . Wait...so that's only a single exit? Such distances are comparable to Tyler/Longview, Waco/Temple, Austin/San Marcos. As seen, 1:20 ... too compact.
1/20 times 2 = 2/20, equivalent to 1:10. Ahh, 1:10 scale? Perfect. Instead of 1.5, it's 3.1 . But still too compact. What is three miles in SCS? Imagine the north end of Pueblo to Colorado Springs. SCS also tends to build major cities in larger scales, like Denver being in 1:4, which is more centered around downtown than the outskirts.
How did I get the scale in Denver? Thirteen miles on I-25 from Hampden Ave to I-76 in real life. Three miles in game, and divide 13 by 3. They managed to shove in more things in the east than the west, because the west has mountains. DFW will be a waking nightmare if they expanded the scale of the metropolis with surrounding areas still in 1:20. It's time to start thinking and calculating distances.
I-76 in Colorado. 185 mi --> 1:20 --> 9.25 mi
I-30 in Texas. 223 mi --> 1:20 --> 11.15 mi
Funny along I-76 between Denver and US 385, they only managed to shove in one city. Y'all are crying for multiple towns along I-30, ... in 1:20, nuh uh. Even Jakub (was it) mentioned in the 2020 Xmas stream that "even the backroads are buzzing with life" and that they may take TX a little differently.
Judging by the fact how they only managed to shove Sterling between Denver and Julesburg, they will probably only provide Tyler between Dallas and Marshall, in 1:20 that is.
So 1:10? Yes!
I-20 from Dallas to Marshall (irl miles were measured by me)
Exit as TX 34 in Terrell. - mile 27 - (1:20) mile 1.35 - (1:10) mile 2.7
Exit at TX 19 in Canton. - mile 53 - (1:20) mile 2.65 - (1:10) mile 5.3
Exit at US 69 in Tyler. - mile 82 - (1:20) mile 4.1 - (1:10) mile 8.2
Exit at US 271 in Tyler. - mile 97 - (1:20) mile 4.85 - (1:10) mile 9.7
Exit at US 259 in Longview. - mile 116 - (1:20) mile 5.8 - (1:10) mile 11.6
Exit at US 59 in Marshall. - mile 131 - (1:20) mile 6.55 - (1:10) 13.1
As seen, the 1:20 distances in 1:20 will make the map a little too compact. Louisiana would a lot worse. Baton Rouge to Lafayette is a little under an hour drive IRL, which would be three minutes in 1:20. oops.
I drove from Gulf Shores to New Orleans a few weeks ago, and place to place was like nothing. From my perspective, Biloxi was pretty much next door to Dauphin Island. I am suggesting a 1:15 scale in the Texas panhandle, so an automatic map doubling cannot be sensed. If 1:20 is 1, and 1:10 is 2, 1:15 would be 1.5. Evidence was the Amarillo picture leaked, which displayed that the town would be a bit big for its size.
All of Texas is too compact to be in 1:20.
ATS distance = IRL distance multiplied by scale in game.
Dallas to Fort Worth is about 31 miles. So to calculate the ATS distance that would be 31 * (1/20)
You get 1.55 . Wait...so that's only a single exit? Such distances are comparable to Tyler/Longview, Waco/Temple, Austin/San Marcos. As seen, 1:20 ... too compact.
1/20 times 2 = 2/20, equivalent to 1:10. Ahh, 1:10 scale? Perfect. Instead of 1.5, it's 3.1 . But still too compact. What is three miles in SCS? Imagine the north end of Pueblo to Colorado Springs. SCS also tends to build major cities in larger scales, like Denver being in 1:4, which is more centered around downtown than the outskirts.
How did I get the scale in Denver? Thirteen miles on I-25 from Hampden Ave to I-76 in real life. Three miles in game, and divide 13 by 3. They managed to shove in more things in the east than the west, because the west has mountains. DFW will be a waking nightmare if they expanded the scale of the metropolis with surrounding areas still in 1:20. It's time to start thinking and calculating distances.
I-76 in Colorado. 185 mi --> 1:20 --> 9.25 mi
I-30 in Texas. 223 mi --> 1:20 --> 11.15 mi
Funny along I-76 between Denver and US 385, they only managed to shove in one city. Y'all are crying for multiple towns along I-30, ... in 1:20, nuh uh. Even Jakub (was it) mentioned in the 2020 Xmas stream that "even the backroads are buzzing with life" and that they may take TX a little differently.
Judging by the fact how they only managed to shove Sterling between Denver and Julesburg, they will probably only provide Tyler between Dallas and Marshall, in 1:20 that is.
So 1:10? Yes!
I-20 from Dallas to Marshall (irl miles were measured by me)
Exit as TX 34 in Terrell. - mile 27 - (1:20) mile 1.35 - (1:10) mile 2.7
Exit at TX 19 in Canton. - mile 53 - (1:20) mile 2.65 - (1:10) mile 5.3
Exit at US 69 in Tyler. - mile 82 - (1:20) mile 4.1 - (1:10) mile 8.2
Exit at US 271 in Tyler. - mile 97 - (1:20) mile 4.85 - (1:10) mile 9.7
Exit at US 259 in Longview. - mile 116 - (1:20) mile 5.8 - (1:10) mile 11.6
Exit at US 59 in Marshall. - mile 131 - (1:20) mile 6.55 - (1:10) 13.1
As seen, the 1:20 distances in 1:20 will make the map a little too compact. Louisiana would a lot worse. Baton Rouge to Lafayette is a little under an hour drive IRL, which would be three minutes in 1:20. oops.
I drove from Gulf Shores to New Orleans a few weeks ago, and place to place was like nothing. From my perspective, Biloxi was pretty much next door to Dauphin Island. I am suggesting a 1:15 scale in the Texas panhandle, so an automatic map doubling cannot be sensed. If 1:20 is 1, and 1:10 is 2, 1:15 would be 1.5. Evidence was the Amarillo picture leaked, which displayed that the town would be a bit big for its size.
Rule 2.3 - GDPR Violation
Re: East Coast Speculation Thread
All cities are 1:3 scale, not 1:20. They cut out most of the roads between cities, not in the cities/towns. Granted they can't capture the entire city, they definitely are not 1:20.
My post are only thoughts and ideas. Don't assume it makes ATS.
Poll: Choose Next 2 ATS States
ATS Flatbed
ATS Special Transport
North American Agriculture
Poll: Out of Production Truck
Poll: Choose Next 2 ATS States
ATS Flatbed
ATS Special Transport
North American Agriculture
Poll: Out of Production Truck
Re: East Coast Speculation Thread
I wonder how they'd take on the New York-Newark Metro Area having two different DLCs in between it
Just some random guy
- supersobes
- Global moderator
- Posts: 13714
- Joined: 07 Dec 2016 21:53
- Location: Northern Virginia, USA
- Contact:
Re: East Coast Speculation Thread
That one is easy. Newark is part of New Jersey, and New York is part of New York. They can split it easily at the Hudson River, just like they split the Portland-Vancouver metropolitan area at the Columbia River with Washington and Oregon.
Re: East Coast Speculation Thread
^Exactly. Buttt, I wonder if they take a different approach this time. By the time SCS gets there, the game engine could go thru a few upgrades. It would be nice if across the river, its high res, high quality scenery. Otherwise, they have to go back and redo it again anyways. Just make it good quality the first time. It way to urban in that area to have a lot of low res. If pc performance isn't effected much, go for better quality. The buildings in NYC won't come until NY anyways. I'd like to think Pennsylvania comes with New Jersey and maybe even Delaware. While the Virginias are combined with Maryland which should come first.
My post are only thoughts and ideas. Don't assume it makes ATS.
Poll: Choose Next 2 ATS States
ATS Flatbed
ATS Special Transport
North American Agriculture
Poll: Out of Production Truck
Poll: Choose Next 2 ATS States
ATS Flatbed
ATS Special Transport
North American Agriculture
Poll: Out of Production Truck
Re: East Coast Speculation Thread
Makes sense, but they'll have to make the Manhattan Skyline for the background. Then once they work on New York they'll have to come back n' destroy stuff and redo the area. So who knows ¯\_(ツ)_/¯supersobes wrote: ↑06 Jan 2022 03:48 That one is easy. Newark is part of New Jersey, and New York is part of New York. They can split it easily at the Hudson River, just like they split the Portland-Vancouver metropolitan area at the Columbia River with Washington and Oregon.
Just some random guy
Re: East Coast Speculation Thread
I wouldn't destroy the background. That's a waste of time. They'd have to figure out something though. But doing the work twice is no good. What they'd be better off doing is 2 models just like many other things. One low poly at distance model and a close up higher res. By the time we get there, the game engine should be good to go with newer tech perhaps. Each building will need two versions though. So with New Jersey, they will have to make Manhattan low poly. That is the simplest approach. Lock the high res models to New York dlc. The pic below is on US-95 looking East towards Manhattan. Anything East of I-95, I'd do as extension roads to the NY dlc. So low poly like below works for New Jersey. If you buy NY, the closer to get to the Hudson, the high res models load up. If you don't buy NY, you won't get the roads towards the Hudson in the first place and you are stuck with the low res in the distance models.
[ external image ]
I-95 between I-278 and I-78 looks juicy. I don't think we get the Newark Airport. I'd rather see JFK for that area anyways as it has more space. With 3 airports, we should get one for sure for that area. For Newark, those portssssssss. There are 2 massive ports and a huge car port tier. I think we should at all 3.
[ external image ]
I-95 between I-278 and I-78 looks juicy. I don't think we get the Newark Airport. I'd rather see JFK for that area anyways as it has more space. With 3 airports, we should get one for sure for that area. For Newark, those portssssssss. There are 2 massive ports and a huge car port tier. I think we should at all 3.
My post are only thoughts and ideas. Don't assume it makes ATS.
Poll: Choose Next 2 ATS States
ATS Flatbed
ATS Special Transport
North American Agriculture
Poll: Out of Production Truck
Poll: Choose Next 2 ATS States
ATS Flatbed
ATS Special Transport
North American Agriculture
Poll: Out of Production Truck
Re: East Coast Speculation Thread
New York---> south (with few exceptions) shouldn't be a huge issue, the states are still somewhat large. Once you are northeast of New York, EVERYTHING shrinks in size. Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Mass, Rhode Island, and Connecticut combined are about the same square mileage as one of the bigger square western states. There's no way they can do the northeast justice if they stick to the current scale. I look at all the stuff that DOESN'T make DLC now because it's all too close for the scale size.
There will have to be some type of adjustment to the scale, be it a cut scene or something. I'm not for breaking immersion, but I think easiest would be a cut scene type scenario as one crossed bridges in NY into New England. The Hudson River has a mess of interstates that cross over it, so that could be the cut scene change over. Wouldn't have to be anything huge, maybe a pan and scan type shot of an 18 wheeler or traffic crossing the bride, then it puts you back in cab to continue your journey though now at a different scale. That kind of transition would cover any of the roads that would really be in any DLC. I-84, I-90, I-95. In the northern portion of the state, there'd have to be a ferry service anyway (not sure if they actually ferry commercial trucks over them) otherwise they're gonna have to draw US-11 all the way to the top of NY to get into Burlington, VT (which really needs to be in the DLC for that state). Either way, river crossings can serve as cuts to different scale sizes. I think 1:15 is still tight for a lot of New England.
Maine is my homestate, and I know I'm absolutely biased at all the things that *SHOULD* make the DLC, but if they don't alter the scale, there's a mess of things that are going to get missed and the DLC is going to fall flatter than flat. Coastal drives (which should rival west coast pacific drives) with light houses, rugged coastline. Tourist attraction stuff. Balanced with driving into hilled/mountain terrain toward NH, Moosehead Lakes region with the Maine Highland regions (huge logging industry). Coastal maine with it's lucrative fishing/lobstering industry. You can't accurately develop a map asset when everything will be stacked on top of each other.
I do understand the concerns when swapping scales, changing times it takes to traverse distances. Unfortunately, with the map scale as it is, I don't see any way around it..... if they want to do New England justice, that is.
There will have to be some type of adjustment to the scale, be it a cut scene or something. I'm not for breaking immersion, but I think easiest would be a cut scene type scenario as one crossed bridges in NY into New England. The Hudson River has a mess of interstates that cross over it, so that could be the cut scene change over. Wouldn't have to be anything huge, maybe a pan and scan type shot of an 18 wheeler or traffic crossing the bride, then it puts you back in cab to continue your journey though now at a different scale. That kind of transition would cover any of the roads that would really be in any DLC. I-84, I-90, I-95. In the northern portion of the state, there'd have to be a ferry service anyway (not sure if they actually ferry commercial trucks over them) otherwise they're gonna have to draw US-11 all the way to the top of NY to get into Burlington, VT (which really needs to be in the DLC for that state). Either way, river crossings can serve as cuts to different scale sizes. I think 1:15 is still tight for a lot of New England.
Maine is my homestate, and I know I'm absolutely biased at all the things that *SHOULD* make the DLC, but if they don't alter the scale, there's a mess of things that are going to get missed and the DLC is going to fall flatter than flat. Coastal drives (which should rival west coast pacific drives) with light houses, rugged coastline. Tourist attraction stuff. Balanced with driving into hilled/mountain terrain toward NH, Moosehead Lakes region with the Maine Highland regions (huge logging industry). Coastal maine with it's lucrative fishing/lobstering industry. You can't accurately develop a map asset when everything will be stacked on top of each other.
I do understand the concerns when swapping scales, changing times it takes to traverse distances. Unfortunately, with the map scale as it is, I don't see any way around it..... if they want to do New England justice, that is.
Re: East Coast Speculation Thread
@flight50 Newark Liberty Airport sees more freight than JFK.
In a world full of swift drivers, I'm an O/O.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Crysta1ake, Grizzly, Rocket455Man, room217au and 19 guests